Thanks, Surajit ji, for such a discussion looking at the accuracy of efi site. More such discussions at efi are welcome. I have gone through your details furnished.
Regarding *"Why should we go for confusion when we have clear dictate from GRIN and F. B. I.?"->* I think Both your FBI page as well as GRIN did not mention *Kalanchoe integra* (Medikus) Kuntze anywhere directly. Record of GRIN has been updated in 2005, while The Plant List was released in 2010. *Kalanchoe integra*<http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?430177> auct. (not of the author) is a different species from *Kalanchoe integra*(Medikus) Kuntze. On 21 February 2013 23:04, surajit koley <[email protected]>wrote: > Garg Sir, > > This is related to *Balkar Sir's post of Kalanchoe spathulata* - > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/indiantreepix/a1Sol8JlM0g/discussion which > is integrated in eFI taxon *K. integra* - > https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/species/a---l/cl/crassulaceae/kalanchoe/kalanchoe-integra > . > > Please, see the attached screenshot that informs *Kalanchoe integra has > some confusion*. According to GRIN it is synonym of *K. spathulata* DC. - > http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?430177. > > *Kalanchoe spathulata DC. is accepted taxon in GRIN* - > http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?21092. > > Flora of British India, vol.2, > p414<http://ia600603.us.archive.org/BookReader/BookReaderImages.php?id=mobot21753000004415&itemPath=%2F33%2Fitems%2Fmobot21753000004415&server=ia600603.us.archive.org&page=n418_w1150.jpg>informs > that the plant is distributed in tropical Himalaya, from Bhutan to > Kashmir. > > Though The Plant List <http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/record/tro-8902766> > , FoC<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=241000241>and > FoP > <http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=5&taxon_id=241000241>equate > *K. spathulata* DC. with *Kalanchoe integra* (Medikus) Kuntze, I think we > should maintain the taxon as *Kalanchoe spathulata DC. as in GRIN and In > F. B. I.* > > More so because :- > > 1. FoNA doesn't equate *K. integra* with *K. spathulata* - > http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=1&taxon_id=241000241 > 2. *Cotyledon spathulata* (DC.) Poir. of > FoC<http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=2&taxon_id=241000241> is > different in The Plant List - > http://www.theplantlist.org/tpl/record/kew-2740351 > > Why should we go for confusion when we have clear dictate from GRIN and F. > B. I.? > > Regards, > > surajit > > -- With regards, J.M.Garg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jmgarg1 'Creating awareness of Indian Flora & Fauna' The whole world uses my Image Resource of more than a *thousand species* & eight thousand images of Birds, Butterflies, Plants etc. (arranged alphabetically & place-wise): http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:J.M.Garg. You can also use them for free as per Creative Commons license attached with each image. For identification, learning, discussion & documentation of Indian Flora, please visit/ join our Efloraofindia Google e-group: http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix (more than 2045 members & 1,45,000 messages on 31/1/13) or Efloraofindia website: https://sites.google.com/site/efloraofindia/ (with a species database of more than 8000 species). Also author of 'A Photoguide to the Birds of Kolkata & Common Birds of India'. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "efloraofindia" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
